Jimmy Connors' 91 USO is now a footnote.

BGod

G.O.A.T.
The 2013 ESPN 30 for 30 documentary titled " This is what they want" reviewed Connors' magical run in 1991 to the semifinals of the US Open. This, granted in a weak draw after 1 year off due to injury at 39 years of age.

At the time, Federer winning his 7th Wimbledon to tie Sampras at near age 31 was hailed as a triumph.

Now in 2019, Federer has made yet another Wimbledon final at near age 38. And you have to look at Nadal and Novak still going as well as Wawrinka's late career push and recovery.

Jimmy Connors' 1991 US Open is now a footnote which will pale in comparison to Federer at the very least if not overshadowed by Novak/Nadal's twilight year runs.

I'd like to reflect how such a miracle run is now aged so poorly in hindsight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

Rafa24

Hall of Fame
it was impressive for a long time as until the 3 goats people don't usually win majors after 30. Or it was rare. And to be pushing 40 it's wild. Not sure if it's advances in sports nutrition, training/recovery methods etc. but tennis isn't a game dominated by mid 20s people anymore. lots more players are playing into their 30s.
 

BGod

G.O.A.T.
it was impressive for a long time as until the 3 goats people don't usually win majors after 30. Or it was rare. And to be pushing 40 it's wild. Not sure if it's advances in sports nutrition, training/recovery methods etc. but tennis isn't a game dominated by mid 20s people anymore. lots more players are playing into their 30s.

A similar age field existed at the dawn of the OE too.

Still, only Federer, Nadal, Rosewall and Agassi have won Slams at age 32 or older. Novak technically hasn't yet.
 

BGod

G.O.A.T.
Nah, not if you know anything about the sport and how rare it was for 30+ players to make deep runs in major back then.

Well Rosewall actually won at 36 and 37. Jimbo never won past 31. It was only a big deal because he had a year off and was an American playing the American Slam. Let's be real.

But Fed winning 3 Slams at ages 35 and 36 most recently as the GOAT has pushed Connors out of the way there and Nadal/Novak continuing just echoes Roger. Now obviously a lack of American men prevailing recently might keep him in the conversation but Sampras won 14 Slams and his record is now largely forgotten. That 2013 special came out at the right time but it'll be in the dust bin if it isn't already.
 
Jimmy was throttled in the 1991 us open semifinal. Mister roger will do the same at 39, if he is even actively playing the atp tour.
 

zagor

Bionic Poster
Well Rosewall actually won at 36 and 37. Jimbo never won past 31. It was only a big deal because he had a year off and was an American playing the American Slam. Let's be real.

But Fed winning 3 Slams at ages 35 and 36 most recently as the GOAT has pushed Connors out of the way there and Nadal/Novak continuing just echoes Roger. Now obviously a lack of American men prevailing recently might keep him in the conversation but Sampras won 14 Slams and his record is now largely forgotten. That 2013 special came out at the right time but it'll be in the dust bin if it isn't already.

Rosewall is from a wood era, that's a completely different ballgame. From Connors era he's the sole guy that was a slam contender in his early-mid 30s, JMac, Wilander, even Lendl all of them were done as contenders long before. Then in the 90 it was the norm for the player to be essentially done by the time they're 29-30 with Agassi bein the sole exception.

Currently, we're in one of the oldest fields ever. What the big 3 (especially Fed) are doing is exceptional but is not as big of a contrast as Jimbo playing 20 years younger Courier in the USO SF.
 
Top